Thirumarayoor Service … vs The Commercial Tax Officer on 4 June, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 13980 of 2008(L)


1. THIRUMARAYOOR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, KERALA VALUE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.P.JACOB

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH

 Dated :04/06/2008

 O R D E R
                                  K.M.JOSEPH, J.
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                           WP.(C) No. 13980 of 2008
                       - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       Dated this the 4th day of June, 2008

                                     JUDGMENT

Exts.P2 to P10 are sought to be quashed. Petitioner also seeks

a direction to the respondent to accept and act upon the return submitted by

the petitioner as per Exts.P12 to P19 with the payment of due tax and pass

necessary consequential orders.

2. Case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:

Petitioner is a Co-operative Society. The respondent issued

Ext.P1 asking the petitioner to file return for the period from 1.4.2007 to

30.4.2007. Similar notices were issued for the period from 1.5.2007

onwards. Petitioner could not file the return in time due to the accounting

system. The petitioner approached the respondent and requested for time

for regularising the account. Thereafter assessment order is passed

alleging that the return has not been furnished. Exts.P3 to P10 are similar

proceedings. Thereafter, according to the petitioner, without delay they

made arrangements to prepare the return as required by the respondent and

prepared correct accounts and submitted before the respondent. It was

accompanied by Ext.P11, a letter requesting acceptance of the return.

Exts.P12 to P19 are such requests for the period from May, 2007 to

WPC. 13980/2008. 2

December, 2007. According to the petitioner, the request of the petitioner

as evidenced by Exts. P12 to P19 ought to have been acted upon and in

view of the filing of the return subsequently by the petitioner, and the

assessment orders passed against the petitioner should be reconsidered.

3. I heard learned Government Pleader also. It is pointed out

that there is no provision as such to act upon the request made by the

petitioner in this case. The assessments have been completed as evidenced

by the impugned orders and this was preceded by proper notice which was

not in dispute and when the petitioner had failed to act upon the notice, the

logical consequences followed and the assessment being completed. The

remedy of the petitioner is to file appeal. Then learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the petitioner will prefer appeals against the orders

and the amount which had already been deposited may be taken note of

while deciding the appeal and the stay petition. He submits that the

amounts which had already been paid by the petitioner subsequently may be

adjusted towards the amount demanded in accordance with law.

In such circumstances, while rejecting the claim of the

petitioner to act upon the request submitted by the petitioner, the writ

petition is disposed of directing that if the petitioner files appeal

WPC. 13980/2008. 3

accompanied by stay petition in accordance with law, while considering the

stay petition the appellate authority will give due weight to the payments

made by the petitioner subsequent to the assessment orders in accordance

with law.

(K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE)

sb